This is a blog for entries on politics, economics, current affairs, religion, history, philosophy and travel. I mostly muse on events concerning India.

Sunday, September 12, 2010

10 Reasons why Kashmir must be given the Right to Self-determination

1. Kashmir was already Independent in 1947.

Pakistan and India invaded it. India could have helped to protect Kashmiri Sovereignty from invading Pakistanis. Instead India blackmailed the Dogra King to join the Indian Union.

2. India promised a Plebiscite and then reneged on its promise.

There really is no excuse for this. Pakistan is more than willing to withdraw its forces from POK, if India did so from IHK. There is even a UN mission (UNMOGIP) established specifically to monitor troop positions in Kashmir.

3. The Betrayal of 1953.

India betrayed Kashmir in 1953 by going back on many of the terms of the 1948 accession. Karan Singh (son of Maharajah Hari Singh, an Indian puppet and even today a Congress leader) dismissed Sheikh Abdullah, the Prime Minister of Kashmir, without allowing him the opportunity to prove his majority in the assembly. The Sheikh will spend the next 11 years in Jail (till 1964), 3 years (1965-1968) under house arrest and another 18 months (1970-71) exiled in South India (Kodaikanal).

4. India makes cunning deals with two Kashmiri families; never with the people.

India's involvement with Kashmir is mostly through deals with two families, Maharajah Hari Singh family or the Abdullah family. Never with the people of Kashmir. There is no reason to believe Kashmiris supported Hari Singh's decision to accede to India or Sheikh Abdullah's decision (in 1974 after 15 years spent in jails) to drop the Plebiscite demand.

5. India continuously rigged elections in Kashmir until 2002.

Or didn't conduct elections at all. When separatists contested elections, India rigged the polls to defeat them. India also claims that separatists who contest elections under the Indian constitution are accepting Kashmir's accession to India! Worse, India even claims that people merely voting in the elections, is evidence of their accession to India. Most Kashmiris reject this assertion.

6. Kashmiri Pandits are ... well, Kashmiris.

Pandits are a very small minority community who don't necessarily support the Kashmiri freedom struggle. They were harmed by predominantly non-Kashmiri militants from Pakistan. Some Kashmiri's did try to save Pandits from the militants. Nevertheless, the Kashmiri civil society will have to do more to accommodate the interests of Pandits. And these Pandits can very well vote (from refugee camps in Jammu or Delhi) to keep Kashmir within the Indian Union, if they want to.

7. Human Rights violations.

Almost every government or human rights organization in the world has called out India for gross human rights violations in Kashmir. Even Indian media report staged killings, fake encounters, disappearances and custodial murders by the Army, CRPF and the erstwhile STF of the J&K police. While some misdemeanor by Armed forces is expected in any conflict, India has provisions like AFSPA which give the Armed forces unlimited powers (and near complete judicial immunity) to harass the civilians. 7 Indian states are currently under such Military rule.

8. India doesn't trust Kashmiri Police.

Why isn't India allowing Kashmiris to police themselves? Militancy that raged since 1989 mostly stopped in 2002. Why are so many outsiders (Army/CRPF) still there? One possible explanation is that India doesn't trust Kashmiris to make a strong police force out of them. And India offers to train the Afghan Army!

9. There are precedents - East Timor, Eastern Europe

Independence movements are not old history book stuff. There are contemporary examples of Republics letting some of their citizens to form separate states. Indonesian occupation of East Timor is remarkably similar to that of Kashmir.

10. Indian Republic is not a Kashmiri concern.

The argument that Indian Republic will fall apart or get balkanized if we let Kashmir go, doesn't wash. India's failures to protect the liberty of people in the North-East is not really a Kashmiri concern. Its India which has to sort out the mess. I support referendums to resolve such issues as Nagalim or Telangana too.

****

And finally, a part of me wishes that Kashmiris will vote to stay in the Indian Union instead of choosing Independence (most likely) or merger with Pakistan. But its Kashmiris who have to decide for themselves.

A place where the will of the people isn't reflected in the Union or its Government is neither a Republic nor a Democracy.

ps 1: I have deliberately used the word Kashmir instead of Jammu and Kashmir. In general, Kashmir refers to the Kashmiri speaking regions, Kashmir Valley, the surrounding mountains and POK.

ps 2: The people in the plains of Jammu, plains of POK, rugged hills of Gilgit-Baltistan (extending to Siachin and Kargil) and the Ladakh plateau will also have to vote in the referendum for Kashmiri Independence. Hence all these regions will first have to vote in a referendum to formally dismantle the J&K state. Only if they want to, ofcourse.

A place where the will of the people isn't reflected in the Union or its Government is neither a Republic nor a Democracy.

Well, democracy does not mean that we will allow the country to be divided again. If people of any region, not just Kashmir have any problems, they have legal means like parliament, state assembly and media to let their voices heard.If they resort to violence, of course they will be put under army rule.

BTW, Telengana is not a movement for independence. They just want a separate stae.

Parliaments and Assemblies are established under the existing constitution. Secession or division of states significantly alters the state for which the constitution was made. Amendment's won't do for such major changes. Referendums are needed.

oh please, i know about the Telangana statehood issue.

my point is: some people want to split a unit of governance, namely the state of Andhra Pradesh. that has to be decided in a referendum.

similarly if Kashmir or Manipur or Tamilnadu want to secede, there shud first be a referendum at the state level. based on the result of such a referendum, Parliament can vote or even call a nationwide referendum.

you are eating from the Indian govt's coffers and you have the balls to say you want to separate.you kashmiris are one filthy valley in a whole big state. you cannot decide on everybody's future.so just back off and stop spreading disinformation.

Great post. You have had the guts to bell the cat. I understand the general tone of your argument and sympathise entirely with the Kashmiris. But Indian state cannot afford to lose Kashmir for geo-political reasons. India has a historical fear for the invader from the north and the hence people in Delhi would not want to lose the Kashmir valley and thus directly expose our plains. For the same reason, China and Pakistan would also never allow an independent Kashmir to exist peacefully. In this case the plight of Kashmir is sadly similar to the Afghanistan. It's strategic location means that other powers will never leave it alone. I feel the best bet for Kashmiris is to demand complete autonomy within the Indian setup and to demand that Indian Army be confined to the borders. This will not sacrifice India's concerns and allow Kashmiris maximum political freedom. India for it's part can play the trade card. Kashmir is a land-locked region and will need access to mainland India for trade. India can put across to the Kashmiris that in the event of complete Independence it will become impossible for India to allow movement of goods and people from Kashmir into India ( It is already restricted indeed ). This will convince Kashmiris of the practical impossibility of azadi however noble it sounds. Please do not mistake that I am sounding authoritarian. I just feel that by moderating their demands a little, Kashmiris will gain the moral high ground and gain sympathies for their demands from the rest of India too.